click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121112
20121120
STATION
CSPAN 7
MSNBC 4
MSNBCW 4
CSPAN2 3
LANGUAGE
English 18
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)
not the ones that bill o'reilly wants to celebrate. >> in your book you say ronald reagan lied about poverty so he could succeed. you wrote middle class folks didn't have to worry they were indulging resentment. they were doing it because those programs hurt poor people. reagan said so. do the republicans still believe this message? >> i don't know if they really believe it. i don't know if they care. they don't care about the poor, but they've been selling it for a long time, ed. i'm with michael. he is looking backwards to an america that wasn't as wonderful as he thinks, and he's becoming kind of like a glenn beck figure. he's really not leaving it alone. when he went here on election night, i thought maybe he'll get over it. the majority of americans voted for barack obama. we have values. the majority of catholics voted for barack obama. a vast majority of jews voted for president obama. he has a problem with white protestant southern evangelical people, but he doesn't have -- it's not his whole coalition is secular. we have values, too. >> professor, how can we not come to the conclusion
, 22% interest rates, gas lines, stagflation, in 1980 and very different president got elected. ronald reagan liked barack obama and inherited a struggling economy. and reagan implemented policies 180 degrees opposite, instead of jacking up taxes. he cut taxes. instead of exploding spending and the debt he restrained the growth of spending instead of unleashing the hounds of regulators. when i think of regulators are can't help thinking of mr. burns saying release the hounds. instead of releasing the hounds of regulators on small-businesses and entrepreneurs reagan limited regulation and the result was one of the most extraordinary burst of economic productivity our nation has ever seen. the fourth year of reagan's presidency was 1984 precisely corresponding to the fourth year of obama's presidency. anyone know what gdp growth was in 1984? 7.2. seven.2%. our ideas work, there's don't. if you want growth, jobs, if you want twenty three million people struggling to find work to get jobs, the answer is simply you need growth. you have got to reduce and simplify the tax burden, reduced reg
's going on at and the party splitting again. they always quote ronald reagan, but he said not to speak ill of another republican. we keep forgetting that. we're not using a new technology. romney, i think there was prejudice in the party against his mormonism. i think a lot of evangelists stood back as they did when john mccain ran. we were 3 million votes down. i would like to hear what the other republicans have to say about that. i think bobby jindal is going down the wrong route in jumping on romney now. we had fractional primaries and that took a lot of steam out of romney and set us up for the democratic assaults. host: in georgia now, charles. caller: calling from cleveland, georgia. i believe the republican party pass to get back to the constitution. these undeclared wars have to stop. we threw away the ron paul supporters. we needed them to defeat obama. romney did not mention the constitution many times -excuse- me, i'm nervous. we have to go back to the constitution. if the republicans don't go by the constitution, they are no better than the democrats. host: plenty more time fo
petitions. they did not threaten third- party movements. in a nutshell, what ronald reagan understood was a conservatism was not defined by its resentment. but which actually had a smile on its face. much like reagan himself. that is why it into a curious sort of way, it seems republicans, not out of breath out -- not out of nostalgia am i think for conservatives you can do a lot worse thing go back and look at the real reagan. the pragmatic reagan. the reagan who was willing under certain circumstances to raise taxes. the reagan willing to put dick on his ticket in '76 or george bush four years later. >> the tax policies that some precedent. do you think the fiscal cliff and the presence of the debt ceiling are enough to overcome this culture of obstruction? >> i am not sure it will overcome the culture of destruction. that is in many ways an outgrowth of the political system that we have built. on the other hand, you may not have to overcome the culture of obstruction. only have to pick up -- pick off x number members of congress. >> he said it was time for republicans to stopping t
lines, stagflation. in 1980, a different president got elected. ronald reagan, like barack obama, inherited a struggling economy. ronald reagan implemented policies 180 degrees opposite of barack obama. instead of checking up taxes, he cut taxes. instead of exploding spending and the death, he restrained growth and spending. instead of -- debt, he restrained growth and spending. instead of releasing the hounds of regulators on small businesses and rescue -- entrepreneurs, reagan limited regulation. the result was one of the strongest person of economic activity our nation has ever seen. the fourth year of reagan's presidency was 1984, precisely corresponding to right now in obama's presidency. does anyone know what gdp was then? 7.2%. our ideas work. their ideas do not. if you want the 23 million people struggling finding work to get jobs, the answer is simple. you need growth. to get growth, you have got to reduce and simplify the tax burden, reduce regulations, and unchain small businesses and entrepreneurs. over six -- over 50% of americans who voted on election day believed t
-- you can thank ronald reagan and margaret thatcher for doing it. host: this morning, jodie writes in on twitter, the b.p. disaster was made by bip it. there were safety regulars that were ignored. they know what they were doing before it blew up. we'll go to chad now from farmington, new mexico on the republican line. chad, thanks for calling. caller: yeah, thanks for having me. love what you guys have going on. sorry to say but i am a republican. i just had a question, since they already gave you the projected numbers for what they plan on spending everything on, does that show that they just don't plan on giving anybody, any people that were actually affected any money at all? host: what do you mean by that? caller: like, since they already gave the projected numbers of how much money they're spending on each individual group that they gave money to, do they plan on those groups giving the money to the people that actually were affected by it? host: i'll point you back to the "new york times" graphic on this. b.p. has set aside $42 billion to cover the cost related to the spill.
the rates. think about it. we haven't touched it since ronald reagan really. in 1986. bill clinton did raise the rate one point but we haven't done anything to touch our rate and reform our code. every other country, all of them have. taxes gone from 16% to 15%. you do business there. this flow of capital will follow countries that have more competitive environment and taxes are one of them. yes, we have to reform the tax code. when you do that, i will get more revenue. it is guaranteed. again, sort of as i was talking about earlier. this is opportunities here. this is opportunity for us as a country. if you look at the congressional budget analysis and joint tax committee analysis, what tax reform could mean in terms of macroeconomic impact and growth, all will lead to more growth, whether corporate tax reform or individual tax reform. >> right but if the president insists as he did last friday, this was fought over in the campaign and, fought over tax rates, rising tax rates, he didn't ice the words rates himself but jay carney, the white house press secretary said the president will veto
to make a comment about this benghazi thing. republicans have made such a big deal out of it. ronald reagan sent over 200 marines to their death and there was no public outrage. where is the republican outrage? only because of obama do we get this kind of reaction. thank you. host: edward, from miami, florida, this morning. another editorial, from being west, former infantryman. host: that is from the former assistant secretary of defense. we're taking your calls on this issue. b.j., good morning. caller: good morning. my question is, who is joe kelly? why would brought well be sending her threatening e-mails? -- broadwell be sending her a threat in e-mails? host: do you think the senate needs to hold a hearing on this? caller: absolutely. i look forward to his testimony under oath this time, rather than giving the cock and bull story from before. it is all because of the video tape. now he cannot be blackmailed by anyone. host: joe kelly is described as a 37-year-old social liaison at the air force base in tampa. host: did he have an affair with her? is that when he was so upset? --
possession. that was one of the solar panels that jimmy carter put on the white house in 1979 and ronald reagan took down in 1985 because he wanted manlier forms of energy. it's not that we lack -- germ and china have better technology. >> that and put it in his private museum in china? i love that story. >> we have the technology. we have the entrepreneurs. we just don't have the political will to do anything with it because we've got the koch brothers and exxon and everybody else in the way. >> we also have a reflexive ideological resistance to government playing a big role. i actually talked to mitt romney's policy director a few weeks before the election. i asked him, you know, what do you think government can do to make coal cleaner, carbon capturing sequestration by doesn't exist on a usable scale. he said i don't think government should play a role at all. there you go. there's the barrier. >> government should play no role except tonight provide massive subsidies to the fossil fuel industry decade after decade. >> can the subsidy for cleaner coal. >> this is where the tax extende
that divided government has sometimes done very important things for the country. think of ronald reagan and tip o'neill reforming social security. ron reagan and tip o'neill during the current tax reform. bill clinton and the republican congress doing welfare reform and balancing the budget. we look forward to making this divided government productive for the american people, and we have, as everyone knows, a lot of challenges at the end of the year. i will be meeting with the president and the other leadership on friday to talk about the way forward. we look forward to being a part of the solution to the significant problems. it is my pleasure to turn to our newly elected whip, senator john corn andyn of texas. >> -- senator john cornyn of texas. >> is an honor to serve as the assistant leader on the republican side. we have a lot of very difficult work to do, but we are committed to working with our colleagues across the aisle to solve the nation's urgent problems. we know what those are in the lame duck and we know what those are going forward. there is no mystery about that, nor is
, stagflation. in 1980, a very, very different president got elected. ronald reagan like barack obama inherited a struggling economy. and reagan implemented policies 180 degrees opposite those of obama. instead of jacking up taxes, he slashed taxes. instead of exploding spending and the debt, he restrained the growth of spending and instead of unleashing the hounds of regulators, by the way, when i think of regulators, i can't help thinking of mr. burns saying "release the hounds!" [laughter] >> instead of releasing the hounds of regulators on small businesses and entrepreneurs, reagan limited regulation and the result was one of the most extraordinary bursts of economic productivity our nation has ever seen. the fourth year of reagan's presidency was 1984, the same as the fourth year of obama's presidency. anyone know what g.d.p. growth was in 1984, 7.2%. our ideas work. their ideas don't. if you want growth, if you want jobs. if you want the 23 million people struggling to find work to get jobs, the answer is simple. you need growth and to get growth, you got to reduce and simplify the tax bu
, it tried to put facts behind ronald reagan saying we fought a war on poverty and poverty won. he basically argued the welfare state had hurt poor people particularly african-americans by discouraging marriage, encouraging laziness, encouraging people to have children out-of-wedlock. he put all the blame on poverty programs. as i was writing this book charles murray writes another book called coming apart:the state of white america and charles murray is now basically saying the same thing about white lower class, really working class men, white men, that he was saying about african-americans in the 80s, that they are working less and getting married less frequently not because of any change in the economy or in culture but because they can be supported by government. he also blamed feminism and that is very interesting. he really has an analysis that says working-class white people struggling because they are lazy and don't get married and hook up. so i started to think white people are starting to say the same thing about you, so mitt romney's 47% remark where he was talking about a majori
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)